21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study

The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of surgical research 2020-02, Vol.246, p.427-434
Hauptverfasser: Wang, Jian, Yao, Fei, Yao, Ju, Xu, Lei, Qian, Jun-Ling, Shan, Li-Mei
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 434
container_issue
container_start_page 427
container_title The Journal of surgical research
container_volume 246
creator Wang, Jian
Yao, Fei
Yao, Ju
Xu, Lei
Qian, Jun-Ling
Shan, Li-Mei
description The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis. From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months. There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups. The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2313355583</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022480419306559</els_id><sourcerecordid>2313355583</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLLDEQhYMoOj5-gJtLlnfTYyrp9ENXw-ALFAUVlyGTVHMzdE-Pqe6B-fdGRu9SKCiKOufA-Rg7BzEFAcXFcrokmkoB9VSkkbDHJiBqnVVFqfbZRAgps7wS-RE7JlqKdNelOmRHCoq61qqcsHcJGd9gpJG41FnX8XmIbmxt5C-DXbfpw5s-8jnGTXC25bOVpaHvegp0yWf8OfZrXFEYttmjHdw_9Mk3-u0pO2hsS3j2vU_Y28316_wue3i6vZ_PHjKntBqyOq-9q5wCVJWXTmjAPPUBdI0uG19AUdS2qPJGeg-ltrYAWeWwcNYuINe5OmF_d7nr2H-MSIPpAjlsW7vCfiQjFSilta5UksJO6mJPFLEx6xg6G7cGhPniaZYm8TRfPI1IIyF5_nzHj4sO_X_HD8AkuNoJMJXcBIyGXMCVQx8iusH4PvwS_wneI4Si</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2313355583</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Wang, Jian ; Yao, Fei ; Yao, Ju ; Xu, Lei ; Qian, Jun-Ling ; Shan, Li-Mei</creator><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jian ; Yao, Fei ; Yao, Ju ; Xu, Lei ; Qian, Jun-Ling ; Shan, Li-Mei</creatorcontrib><description>The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis. From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months. There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups. The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-4804</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8673</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31699537</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects ; Anastomosis-related complications ; Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology ; Anastomotic Leak - etiology ; Cervical anastomosis ; Circular stapler ; Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology ; Constriction, Pathologic - etiology ; Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery ; Esophagectomy - adverse effects ; Esophagectomy - instrumentation ; Esophagectomy - methods ; Esophagostomy - adverse effects ; Esophagostomy - instrumentation ; Esophagostomy - methods ; Female ; Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology ; Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology ; Gastrostomy - adverse effects ; Gastrostomy - instrumentation ; Gastrostomy - methods ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Operative Time ; Propensity Score ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgical Staplers - adverse effects ; Surgical Stapling - adverse effects ; Surgical Stapling - instrumentation ; Surgical Stapling - methods ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>The Journal of surgical research, 2020-02, Vol.246, p.427-434</ispartof><rights>2019 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9416-3617 ; 0000-0002-5338-6395</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31699537$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Fei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Ju</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Lei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qian, Jun-Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shan, Li-Mei</creatorcontrib><title>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</title><title>The Journal of surgical research</title><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><description>The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis. From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months. There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups. The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects</subject><subject>Anastomosis-related complications</subject><subject>Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology</subject><subject>Anastomotic Leak - etiology</subject><subject>Cervical anastomosis</subject><subject>Circular stapler</subject><subject>Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology</subject><subject>Constriction, Pathologic - etiology</subject><subject>Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Esophagectomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Esophagectomy - instrumentation</subject><subject>Esophagectomy - methods</subject><subject>Esophagostomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Esophagostomy - instrumentation</subject><subject>Esophagostomy - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology</subject><subject>Gastrostomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Gastrostomy - instrumentation</subject><subject>Gastrostomy - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Propensity Score</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgical Staplers - adverse effects</subject><subject>Surgical Stapling - adverse effects</subject><subject>Surgical Stapling - instrumentation</subject><subject>Surgical Stapling - methods</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0022-4804</issn><issn>1095-8673</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLLDEQhYMoOj5-gJtLlnfTYyrp9ENXw-ALFAUVlyGTVHMzdE-Pqe6B-fdGRu9SKCiKOufA-Rg7BzEFAcXFcrokmkoB9VSkkbDHJiBqnVVFqfbZRAgps7wS-RE7JlqKdNelOmRHCoq61qqcsHcJGd9gpJG41FnX8XmIbmxt5C-DXbfpw5s-8jnGTXC25bOVpaHvegp0yWf8OfZrXFEYttmjHdw_9Mk3-u0pO2hsS3j2vU_Y28316_wue3i6vZ_PHjKntBqyOq-9q5wCVJWXTmjAPPUBdI0uG19AUdS2qPJGeg-ltrYAWeWwcNYuINe5OmF_d7nr2H-MSIPpAjlsW7vCfiQjFSilta5UksJO6mJPFLEx6xg6G7cGhPniaZYm8TRfPI1IIyF5_nzHj4sO_X_HD8AkuNoJMJXcBIyGXMCVQx8iusH4PvwS_wneI4Si</recordid><startdate>202002</startdate><enddate>202002</enddate><creator>Wang, Jian</creator><creator>Yao, Fei</creator><creator>Yao, Ju</creator><creator>Xu, Lei</creator><creator>Qian, Jun-Ling</creator><creator>Shan, Li-Mei</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9416-3617</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5338-6395</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202002</creationdate><title>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</title><author>Wang, Jian ; Yao, Fei ; Yao, Ju ; Xu, Lei ; Qian, Jun-Ling ; Shan, Li-Mei</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects</topic><topic>Anastomosis-related complications</topic><topic>Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology</topic><topic>Anastomotic Leak - etiology</topic><topic>Cervical anastomosis</topic><topic>Circular stapler</topic><topic>Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology</topic><topic>Constriction, Pathologic - etiology</topic><topic>Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Esophagectomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Esophagectomy - instrumentation</topic><topic>Esophagectomy - methods</topic><topic>Esophagostomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Esophagostomy - instrumentation</topic><topic>Esophagostomy - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology</topic><topic>Gastrostomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Gastrostomy - instrumentation</topic><topic>Gastrostomy - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Propensity Score</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgical Staplers - adverse effects</topic><topic>Surgical Stapling - adverse effects</topic><topic>Surgical Stapling - instrumentation</topic><topic>Surgical Stapling - methods</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Fei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Ju</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Lei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qian, Jun-Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shan, Li-Mei</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wang, Jian</au><au>Yao, Fei</au><au>Yao, Ju</au><au>Xu, Lei</au><au>Qian, Jun-Ling</au><au>Shan, Li-Mei</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><date>2020-02</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>246</volume><spage>427</spage><epage>434</epage><pages>427-434</pages><issn>0022-4804</issn><eissn>1095-8673</eissn><abstract>The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis. From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months. There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups. The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>31699537</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9416-3617</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5338-6395</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-4804
ispartof The Journal of surgical research, 2020-02, Vol.246, p.427-434
issn 0022-4804
1095-8673
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2313355583
source MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Aged
Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects
Anastomosis-related complications
Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology
Anastomotic Leak - etiology
Cervical anastomosis
Circular stapler
Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology
Constriction, Pathologic - etiology
Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery
Esophagectomy - adverse effects
Esophagectomy - instrumentation
Esophagectomy - methods
Esophagostomy - adverse effects
Esophagostomy - instrumentation
Esophagostomy - methods
Female
Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology
Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology
Gastrostomy - adverse effects
Gastrostomy - instrumentation
Gastrostomy - methods
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Operative Time
Propensity Score
Retrospective Studies
Surgical Staplers - adverse effects
Surgical Stapling - adverse effects
Surgical Stapling - instrumentation
Surgical Stapling - methods
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
title 21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T22%3A30%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=21-%20versus%2025-mm%20Circular%20Staplers%20for%20Cervical%20Anastomosis:%20A%20Propensity-Matched%20Study&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20surgical%20research&rft.au=Wang,%20Jian&rft.date=2020-02&rft.volume=246&rft.spage=427&rft.epage=434&rft.pages=427-434&rft.issn=0022-4804&rft.eissn=1095-8673&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2313355583%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2313355583&rft_id=info:pmid/31699537&rft_els_id=S0022480419306559&rfr_iscdi=true